HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Notices

Prospect Thread - Part XII

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-26-2012, 07:42 PM
  #351
vanuck
Griffiths Way Goons
 
vanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: Hong Kong
Posts: 10,030
vCash: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by vanwest View Post
I think that you make some good points. There's a tendency among all fan bases to overrate their prospects. The only thing that makes Tanev unique, IMO, is the fact that he grew almost a foot around the year of the draft. Before he grew he was playing with the elite players but was forced to drop out because he was too small. I think that we can't apply the normal rules to him. If he can fill out and gain some strength then we could very well have a defensive gem. He's got the head for the game but needs to improve the physical element. Will he do it? Hard to say but I doubt that there is another prospect out there that we can compare him to. He has only been back to playing high level competitive hockey for the last few years.
Agreed - he's already an exception to the 'rules' as it is, the way he grew so much after he was passed over. Come to think of it, this team has quite a number of guys who beat the overwhelming odds to make it here - Burrows, Hansen, Tanev. A classic late bloomer, although the kind of poise and heady play he's already displaying at 22 years old suggests that there's even more room to grow. He's already so far ahead of the curve anyway for most D-men his age that it doesn't make sense to make such projections on him after only 64 games in the NHL.

vanuck is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 07:45 PM
  #352
Pseudonymous
Registered User
 
Pseudonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,498
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vanwest View Post
I think that you make some good points. There's a tendency among all fan bases to overrate their prospects. The only thing that makes Tanev unique, IMO, is the fact that he grew almost a foot around the year of the draft. Before he grew he was playing with the elite players but was forced to drop out because he was too small. I think that we can't apply the normal rules to him. If he can fill out and gain some strength then we could very well have a defensive gem. He's got the head for the game but needs to improve the physical element. Will he do it? Hard to say but I doubt that there is another prospect out there that we can compare him to. He has only been back to playing high level competitive hockey for the last few years.
I agree. But i dont think strength is his only weakness. I think he needs to greatly increase his shot ability AND somewhat his strength to become a top 4. Otherwise, he'll just be a good 5th D. Also not just shot ability, the mindset to shoot too, the guy has been a player who doesn't even think shoot for a long time, he basically looks for any option other than shoot. Its like Bertuzzi after the Moore incident, decided to stay low key and only pass, completely turned him into another player, 1/4th of the player he was. And you can try to chalk that up to Tanev's age but hes been with the moose/wolves for a while now (3 years + nhl experience) and he still isnt' even the player in that league that puts the puck on the net.

Pseudonymous is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 07:48 PM
  #353
Wisp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 4,972
vCash: 500
Its painfully obvious you haven't watched any Wolves games this season.

Wisp is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 07:53 PM
  #354
Pseudonymous
Registered User
 
Pseudonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,498
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wisp View Post
Its painfully obvious you haven't watched any Wolves games this season.
Yes I have, ive watched 80 percent of them. But ill admit i haven't paid as much attention to him as I have with Kassian/Schroeder/Pinner/ and other forwards

But I have heard it echoed countless times in the Wolves thread during the games this season that he still has an extremely weak shot and his ability to get through still isn't good, so that is where i have confirmed what i suspect is still the same. Ill watch him closely the next few games and then ill come back here and confirm which im sure ill be able to do because i dont suspect hes any difference, hes got a low shot count and the same offensive numbers

Pseudonymous is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 07:55 PM
  #355
Tiranis
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 20,955
vCash: 500
This thread has turned quite painful the last few pages. Vlasic has managed to be a Top 4 D without any sort of shot or physicality. Tanev is probably 10x as smart, so I'm sure he can also carve out a career. What made Nicklas Lidstrom special sure as hell wasn't his shot or his strength. This is such a simplistic argument, I can't believe anyone is actually wasting their time arguing with you for so long.

As for his play with the Wolves, he's on pace for 115 shots on target over 82 games and he's shooting at about 5% which is pretty average for a defenseman. And I still don't know what that has to do with his ability to step up to play as Top 4 D.

Tiranis is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 07:58 PM
  #356
Hodgy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,228
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiranis View Post
This thread has turned quite painful the last few pages. Vlasic has managed to be a Top 4 D without any sort of shot or physicality. Tanev is probably 10x as smart, so I'm sure he can also carve out a career.
While I do think the Tanev/Vlasic statement is apt, I think the bolded portion of your statement is a gross overstatement. Heck, I am not sure if I agree that Tanev is even smarter than Vlasic. You don't play in the NHL as an 18 year old defensemen unless you quite smart IMO.

Hodgy is online now  
Old
11-26-2012, 08:00 PM
  #357
14s incisor
Registered User
 
14s incisor's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Vancouver Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 591
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pseudonymous01 View Post
I agree. But i dont think strength is his only weakness. I think he needs to greatly increase his shot ability AND somewhat his strength to become a top 4. Otherwise, he'll just be a good 5th D. Also not just shot ability, the mindset to shoot too, the guy has been a player who doesn't even think shoot for a long time, he basically looks for any option other than shoot. Its like Bertuzzi after the Moore incident, decided to stay low key and only pass, completely turned him into another player, 1/4th of the player he was. And you can try to chalk that up to Tanev's age but hes been with the moose/wolves for a while now (3 years + nhl experience) and he still isnt' even the player in that league that puts the puck on the net.
This is currently Tanev's 3rd season with the Moose/Wolves (nice quick edit), and all have been short seasons due to callups. Had he been left in the AHL for a full season, and developed some chemistry with his partner/teammates, his points would likely be higher.

He's also improved on his point totals every season. There's absolutely no reason to think he won't continue to improve, and end up being a 20-30 assist (last time I checked, assists were points, too), smart, defensively sound top 4 defender.

14s incisor is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 08:02 PM
  #358
Pseudonymous
Registered User
 
Pseudonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,498
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiranis View Post
This thread has turned quite painful the last few pages. Vlasic has managed to be a Top 4 D without any sort of shot or physicality. Tanev is probably 10x as smart, so I'm sure he can also carve out a career. What made Nicklas Lidstrom special sure as hell wasn't his shot or his strength. This is such a simplistic argument, I can't believe anyone is actually wasting their time arguing with you for so long.
Painful? Because i disagree with your assessment of a player. So painful.

I have given lots to back up my opinions.

I could list the top 4 of all teams and count the players who lack both those attributes and the list would be extremely short but then you can say that my opinion that its not exactly a good chance he makes it into the top 4 is outrageous and "painful"

Look what Tyler Ennis is doing, if a team had a player of his size on their farm team, do you think they'd think hes got a good shot? No. Its a big uphill battle for player that lack certain attributes

And regarding Vlasic, and like most players you'll mention, they had the ability to put up numbers prior to and during the NHL. Which i mentioned previously, if you put up mediocre numbers and dont have strength, you typically wont be a top 4. Vlasic put up big numbers in junior and on top of that, put up numbers in the nhl. And you can go ahead and find a few exceptions but like ive repeated 10 times, there are exceptions!!!

People are arguing my points without reading all my posts


Last edited by Pseudonymous: 11-26-2012 at 08:07 PM.
Pseudonymous is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 08:05 PM
  #359
Pseudonymous
Registered User
 
Pseudonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,498
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 14s incisor View Post
This is currently Tanev's 3rd season with the Moose/Wolves (nice quick edit), and all have been short seasons due to callups. Had he been left in the AHL for a full season, and developed some chemistry with his partner/teammates, his points would likely be higher.

He's also improved on his point totals every season. There's absolutely no reason to think he won't continue to improve, and end up being a 20-30 assist (last time I checked, assists were points, too), smart, defensively sound top 4 defender.
3 seasons, shortened or not. It typically doesn't take that long to become a player that thinks, hey maybe i should take a shot. That usually comes by the time a player is a top D for the team and getting callups to the next league

Pseudonymous is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 08:08 PM
  #360
Pseudonymous
Registered User
 
Pseudonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,498
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hodgy View Post
While I do think the Tanev/Vlasic statement is apt, I think the bolded portion of your statement is a gross overstatement. Heck, I am not sure if I agree that Tanev is even smarter than Vlasic. You don't play in the NHL as an 18 year old defensemen unless you quite smart IMO.
And put up good offensive numbers

Remember, i never said his strength what was holding him back, i said the combination of lack of shot and lack of strength. Vlasic doesn't have a problem with offense

Pseudonymous is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 08:08 PM
  #361
14s incisor
Registered User
 
14s incisor's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Vancouver Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 591
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pseudonymous01 View Post
3 seasons, shortened or not. It typically doesn't take that long to become a player that thinks, hey maybe i should take a shot. That usually comes by the time a player is a top D for the team and getting callups to the next league
What's wrong with passing? He's extremely good at it. There are a lot of good pass-first players—there's absolutely nothing wrong with that.

14s incisor is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 08:10 PM
  #362
Tiranis
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 20,955
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pseudonymous01 View Post
Painful? Because i disagree with your assessment of a player. So painful.

I have given lots to back up my opinions.

I could list the top 4 of all teams and count the players who lack both those attributes and the list would be extremely short but then you can say that my opinion that its not exactly a good chance he makes it into the top 4 is outrageous and "painful"

Look what Tyler Ennis is doing, if a team had a player of his size on their farm team, do you think they'd think hes got a good shot? No. Its a big uphill battle for player that lack certain attributes

And regarding Vlasic, and like most players you'll mention, they had the ability to put up numbers prior to and during the NHL. Which i mentioned previously, if you put up mediocre numbers and dont have strength, you typically wont be a top 4. Vlasic put up big numbers in junior and on top of that, put up numbers in the nhl

People are arguing my points without reading all my posts
A quick scan of Top 60 players by ES ice-time yielded 5 names of players that clearly don't have either a shot or much strength: Vlasic, MacDonald, Butler, Larsson and Martin. You could easily add Bouwmeester to that list since he doesn't play physical and shies away from contact despite his fairly good frame. I could easily put together more names, especially now that I look at the next 60 names.

A more accurate statement would be that to be a Top 4 defenseman you need to excel at one or two things and do those really well. Tanev has that: his hockey IQ, his skating and his first pass. The rest doesn't matter, he can get by just using those three qualities. Doesn't mean he's guaranteed to make it as a Top 4 guy but I wouldn't bet against him at this point.

Tiranis is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 08:11 PM
  #363
14s incisor
Registered User
 
14s incisor's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Vancouver Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 591
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pseudonymous01 View Post
And put up good offensive numbers
16, 18, and 23 points (MAV's last 3 seasons), is totally within range of what Tanev could accomplish as a top4 D right now.

14s incisor is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 08:12 PM
  #364
arsmaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 16,503
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pseudonymous01 View Post
Painful? Because i disagree with your assessment of a player. So painful.

I have given lots to back up my opinions.

I could list the top 4 of all teams and count the players who lack both those attributes and the list would be extremely short but then you can say that my opinion that its not exactly a good chance he makes it into the top 4 is outrageous and "painful"

Look what Tyler Ennis is doing, if a team had a player of his size on their farm team, do you think they'd think hes got a good shot? No. Its a big uphill battle for player that lack certain attributes

And regarding Vlasic, and like most players you'll mention, they had the ability to put up numbers prior to and during the NHL. Which i mentioned previously, if you put up mediocre numbers and dont have strength, you typically wont be a top 4. Vlasic put up big numbers in junior and on top of that, put up numbers in the nhl

People are arguing my points without reading all my posts
Chris Tanev scored 10 goals and had 28 points in 41 games in his first and only season in NCAA...later that year he played in the Stanley Cup finals, and played well.

The year prior he had 41 points in 50 games in a Junior A league.

I'd say he's made quite the rise, pretty steep development curve, no?

So there is previous production for you.

I like what it say when you look up Chris Tanev on eliteprospects:

Quote:
A defenceman who rose from the NCAA to the Stanley Cup Final in a year. Moves the puck well. Very calm and patient. Needs to bulk up and become tougher.
The bulk and the toughness is your focus obviously, but many are valuing the puck movement, calmness and patience.

I think you need the latter 3 more than the first two to be a top 4 NHL defensman.

arsmaster is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 08:12 PM
  #365
Pseudonymous
Registered User
 
Pseudonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,498
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 14s incisor View Post
What's wrong with passing? He's extremely good at it. There are a lot of good pass-first players—there's absolutely nothing wrong with that.
Because his ability to pass would need to be AMAZING to outweigh lack of strength of lack of shot, which it is not, or he would put up numbers like all other D's who lack strength. D's can't get into the top 4 with those two flaws. Look around the NHL! And not only that, we're talking about the canucks, the top team in the league.

Pseudonymous is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 08:15 PM
  #366
Tiranis
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 20,955
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pseudonymous01 View Post
Because his ability to pass would need to be AMAZING to outweigh lack of strength of lack of shot, which it is not, or he would put up numbers like all other D's who lack strength. D's can't get into the top 4 with those two flaws. Look around the NHL! And not only that, we're talking about the canucks, the top team in the league.
Maybe it's because most Top 4 defensemen don't have the elite skating or great hockey vision that Tanev has so they need something else? Those two qualities are much harder to acquire than a shot or strength.

Tiranis is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 08:16 PM
  #367
14s incisor
Registered User
 
14s incisor's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Vancouver Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 591
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pseudonymous01 View Post
Because his ability to pass would need to be AMAZING to outweigh lack of strength of lack of shot, which it is not, or he would put up numbers like all other D's who lack strength. D's can't get into the top 4 with those two flaws. Look around the NHL! And not only that, we're talking about the canucks, the top team in the league.
Yeah, this is obviously a waste of time. There's no reason he can't be 20-30 assist top4 D, who is smart, and sound defensively.

You also ignored the fact that his point totals have improved every season.

14s incisor is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 08:18 PM
  #368
Pseudonymous
Registered User
 
Pseudonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,498
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 14s incisor View Post
16, 18, and 23 points (MAV's last 3 seasons), is totally within range of what Tanev could accomplish as a top4 D right now.
You could put Lapierre with Daniel and Burrows and he'd get 50 points. Does that make him a 1st-2nd liner?

Pseudonymous is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 08:20 PM
  #369
clay
Registered User
 
clay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,705
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by timw33 View Post
Exactly. It wasn't that he was wrong, but that his analysis was purely based on offensive output and took nothing else into consideration. Simon Gamache must've been a can't miss in his analysis.
Read one of my prior posts. I said, generally speaking, strong statistical production at an inferior level is necessary (with the exception of the Lucics Franzens, Burrows) , but not sufficient, to translate into an NHL point producer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by arsmaster View Post
Really, Lukas Kraijcek?

Throwing Lukas' name into the breakdown shows me he was just looking to ruffle feathers.

Kraijcek never displayed Tanev's poise or defensive awareness...he did have a better shot and possibly better offensive instincts, but I think its pretty telling AV coached both and seems to really like Tanev, and hardly ever played Kraijcek.

Tanev's already THIS TEAMS #5, at 22...count me in the group that doesn't think he's peaked.
Krajicek was probably the wrong reference in terms of playing style (even though he did show a lot more poise than you give him credit for), but my point was more that that they are two players who are strong skaters and smart around the ice who IMO simply don't have a complete enough package to translate their skills into a top 4 NHL role.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wisp View Post
I repeat: Tanev played shutdown vs top NHL competition at 22 and did well. Quality possession player.

Anyone who says he's Lukas Kraijcek doesn't know what the hell they're talking about.
See above. He was the first person that came to mind in terms of a Canuck who at times appeared he could blossom into a top 4 player but just didn't have enough to do so.

It really seems like Tanev is probably someone who's better for people to agree to disagree on.

Someone used Willie Mitchell as a comparison as a guy who is top 4 with no offensive skills. Really?? Mitchell is a fierce competitor who strikes fear into any forward who comes close to his goalie, because they know they are going to have to stand up to him if they even knick him. I have not shown any competitive fire from Tanev at all in this regard.

Unless you think Tanev is somehow able to catapult his offensive game into a 30ish point d-man at some point in his career, can you think of a legitimate top 4 d-man in the NHL who tops out at about 20-25 points who shows very little in terms of physicality and toughness? That is the basis of my assessment of Tanev. He has the tools to be a solid bottom pairing guy, but on an elite team, I want my top 4 to bring more than Tanev does. Again, this is based on my assessment that he does not have the offensive tools to consistently hit 30 points from the blueline.

clay is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 08:20 PM
  #370
Pseudonymous
Registered User
 
Pseudonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,498
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 14s incisor View Post
Yeah, this is obviously a waste of time. There's no reason he can't be 20-30 assist top4 D, who is smart, and sound defensively.

You also ignored the fact that his point totals have improved every season.
Hard not to improve when they started off extremely low (7 pts). Also his point per game average didn't exactly improve.

Pseudonymous is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 08:21 PM
  #371
14s incisor
Registered User
 
14s incisor's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Vancouver Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 591
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pseudonymous01 View Post
You could put Lapierre with Daniel and Burrows and he'd get 50 points. Does that make him a 1st-2nd liner?
No, but you're claiming he has to put up points to be a top 4 D. Those are MAV's numbers, a top 4 D, and those numbers are totally within reach of Tanev in a full season.

14s incisor is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 08:22 PM
  #372
14s incisor
Registered User
 
14s incisor's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Vancouver Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 591
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pseudonymous01 View Post
Hard not to improve when they started off extremely low (7 pts). Also his point per game average didn't exactly improve.
Yes it did.

14s incisor is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 08:23 PM
  #373
Tiranis
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 20,955
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by clay View Post
Unless you think Tanev is somehow able to catapult his offensive game into a 30ish point d-man at some point in his career, can you think of a legitimate top 4 d-man in the NHL who tops out at about 20-25 points who shows very little in terms of physicality and toughness? That is the basis of my assessment of Tanev. He has the tools to be a solid bottom pairing guy, but on an elite team, I want my top 4 to bring more than Tanev does. Again, this is based on my assessment that he does not have the offensive tools to consistently hit 30 points from the blueline.
Vlasic. MacDonald. Martin. That's just a few names, I could give you around 15. Just posted a few posts above yours.

Tiranis is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 08:23 PM
  #374
Pseudonymous
Registered User
 
Pseudonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,498
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiranis View Post
Maybe it's because most Top 4 defensemen don't have the elite skating or great hockey vision that Tanev has so they need something else? Those two qualities are much harder to acquire than a shot or strength.
NHL strength for a D man is huge. The D men who dont, typically are players who had the ability to put up numbers, junior, ahl and typically the nhl too.

Same way undersized forwards need to put up big numbers to stay

Pseudonymous is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 08:26 PM
  #375
Tiranis
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 20,955
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pseudonymous01 View Post
NHL strength for a D man is huge. The D men who dont, typically are players who had the ability to put up numbers, junior, ahl and typically the nhl too.

Same way undersized forwards need to put up big numbers to stay
Tanev had 28 points in 41 games in college. Pretty sure that's considered putting up points. He has 4 less points than Kassian right now in 2 less games. Pretty sure that counts as putting up points.

I love how the names I brought up are getting ignored since it's convenient for the both of you. And don't give me that ******** about exceptions. Tanev is already an exception having had a growth spurt so late.

Tiranis is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:23 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.